idnits 2.17.1 draft-ietf-lisp-type-iana-02.txt: Checking boilerplate required by RFC 5378 and the IETF Trust (see https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info): ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- No issues found here. Checking nits according to https://www.ietf.org/id-info/1id-guidelines.txt: ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- No issues found here. Checking nits according to https://www.ietf.org/id-info/checklist : ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- No issues found here. Miscellaneous warnings: ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- == The copyright year in the IETF Trust and authors Copyright Line does not match the current year -- The document date (September 28, 2016) is 2760 days in the past. Is this intentional? Checking references for intended status: Proposed Standard ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- (See RFCs 3967 and 4897 for information about using normative references to lower-maturity documents in RFCs) ** Obsolete normative reference: RFC 5226 (Obsoleted by RFC 8126) ** Obsolete normative reference: RFC 6830 (Obsoleted by RFC 9300, RFC 9301) == Outdated reference: A later version (-07) exists of draft-boucadair-lisp-bulk-03 == Outdated reference: A later version (-05) exists of draft-boucadair-lisp-subscribe-03 == Outdated reference: A later version (-19) exists of draft-ermagan-lisp-nat-traversal-11 == Outdated reference: A later version (-09) exists of draft-ietf-lisp-ddt-08 Summary: 2 errors (**), 0 flaws (~~), 5 warnings (==), 1 comment (--). Run idnits with the --verbose option for more detailed information about the items above. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2 Network Working Group M. Boucadair 3 Internet-Draft C. Jacquenet 4 Intended status: Standards Track Orange 5 Expires: April 1, 2017 September 28, 2016 7 LISP Experimental Message & IANA Registry for LISP Packet Type 8 Allocations 9 draft-ietf-lisp-type-iana-02 11 Abstract 13 This document defines a registry for LISP Packet Type allocations. 14 It also specifies a shared LISP message type for experimentation 15 purposes. 17 Requirements Language 19 The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", 20 "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this 21 document are to be interpreted as described in RFC 2119 [RFC2119]. 23 Status of This Memo 25 This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the 26 provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79. 28 Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering 29 Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute 30 working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet- 31 Drafts is at http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/. 33 Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months 34 and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any 35 time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference 36 material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." 38 This Internet-Draft will expire on April 1, 2017. 40 Copyright Notice 42 Copyright (c) 2016 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the 43 document authors. All rights reserved. 45 This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal 46 Provisions Relating to IETF Documents 47 (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of 48 publication of this document. Please review these documents 49 carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect 50 to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must 51 include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of 52 the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as 53 described in the Simplified BSD License. 55 Table of Contents 57 1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 58 2. LISP Message Type for Experimentations . . . . . . . . . . . 3 59 3. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 60 4. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 61 4.1. LISP Packet Types . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 62 4.2. Sub-Types . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 63 5. Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 64 6. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 65 6.1. Normative references . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 66 6.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 67 Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 69 1. Introduction 71 The Locator/ID Separation Protocol (LISP, [RFC6830] ) base 72 specification defines a set of primitives that are identified with a 73 packet type code. Several extensions have been proposed to add more 74 LISP functionalities. For example, new message types are proposed in 75 [I-D.ietf-lisp-ddt], [I-D.zhao-lisp-mn-extension], 76 [I-D.boucadair-lisp-bulk], [I-D.ermagan-lisp-nat-traversal], or 77 [I-D.boucadair-lisp-subscribe]. It is expected that additional LISP 78 extensions will be proposed in the future. 80 In order to ease the tracking of LISP message types, this document 81 proposes to create a "LISP Packet Types" IANA registry (see 82 Section 4). 84 Because of the limited type space [RFC6830], this document specifies 85 a shared LISP message type for experimentation purposes and proposes 86 a procedure for registering LISP experiment sub-types (see Section 2) 87 that make use of additional LISP capabilities associated with this 88 message type. Concretely, one single LISP message type code is 89 dedicated to experiments; sub-types are used to uniquely identify a 90 given LISP experimental message. These identifiers are selected by 91 the author(s) of the corresponding LISP specification that introduces 92 a new experimental message type. 94 2. LISP Message Type for Experimentations 96 Figure 1 depicts a common LISP experimental message type. The type 97 field MUST be set to 15 (see Section 4). 99 0 1 2 3 100 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 101 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 102 |Type=15| Sub-type | experiment-specific | 103 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 104 // experiment-specific // 105 // // 106 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 108 Figure 1: Common LISP Experimental Message Type 110 The "Sub-type" field conveys a unique identifier that is assigned on 111 a First Come, First Served (FCFS) basis [RFC5226]. These identifiers 112 are registered with IANA (see Section 4.2). 114 The exact structure of the 'experiment-specific' portion of the 115 message is specified in the corresponding specification document. 117 3. Security Considerations 119 This document does not introduce any additional security issues other 120 than those discussed in [RFC6830]. 122 4. IANA Considerations 124 4.1. LISP Packet Types 126 IANA is requested to create a new protocol registry for LISP Packet 127 Types, numbered 0-15. The registry must be initially populated with 128 the following values: 130 Message Code Reference 131 ================================= ==== =============== 132 Reserved 0 [RFC6830] 133 LISP Map-Request 1 [RFC6830] 134 LISP Map-Reply 2 [RFC6830] 135 LISP Map-Register 3 [RFC6830] 136 LISP Map-Notify 4 [RFC6830] 137 LISP Encapsulated Control Message 8 [RFC6830] 138 LISP Experimental Message 15 [This document] 139 The values in the ranges 5-7 and 9-14 can be assigned via Standards 140 Action [RFC5226]. Documents that request for a new LISP packet type 141 may indicate a preferred value in the corresponding IANA sections. 143 The value 15 is reserved for Experimental Use [RFC5226]. 145 4.2. Sub-Types 147 IANA is requested to create a "LISP Experimental Message Sub-types" 148 registry. 150 Entries are assigned on a FCFS basis. 152 The registration procedure should provide IANA with the desired 153 codepoint and a point of contact. Providing a short description 154 (together with an acronym, if relevant) of the foreseen usage of the 155 experimental message is also encouraged. 157 5. Acknowledgments 159 This work is partly funded by ANR LISP-Lab project #ANR-13-INFR- 160 009-X. 162 Many thanks to Luigi Iannone and Dino Farinacci for the review. 164 6. References 166 6.1. Normative references 168 [RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate 169 Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, 170 DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997, 171 . 173 [RFC5226] Narten, T. and H. Alvestrand, "Guidelines for Writing an 174 IANA Considerations Section in RFCs", BCP 26, RFC 5226, 175 DOI 10.17487/RFC5226, May 2008, 176 . 178 [RFC6830] Farinacci, D., Fuller, V., Meyer, D., and D. Lewis, "The 179 Locator/ID Separation Protocol (LISP)", RFC 6830, 180 DOI 10.17487/RFC6830, January 2013, 181 . 183 6.2. Informative References 185 [I-D.boucadair-lisp-bulk] 186 Boucadair, M. and C. Jacquenet, "LISP Mapping Bulk 187 Retrieval", draft-boucadair-lisp-bulk-03 (work in 188 progress), July 2016. 190 [I-D.boucadair-lisp-subscribe] 191 Boucadair, M. and C. Jacquenet, "LISP Subscription", 192 draft-boucadair-lisp-subscribe-03 (work in progress), July 193 2016. 195 [I-D.ermagan-lisp-nat-traversal] 196 Ermagan, V., Farinacci, D., Lewis, D., Skriver, J., Maino, 197 F., and C. White, "NAT traversal for LISP", draft-ermagan- 198 lisp-nat-traversal-11 (work in progress), August 2016. 200 [I-D.ietf-lisp-ddt] 201 Fuller, V., Lewis, D., Ermagan, V., Jain, A., and A. 202 Smirnov, "LISP Delegated Database Tree", draft-ietf-lisp- 203 ddt-08 (work in progress), September 2016. 205 [I-D.zhao-lisp-mn-extension] 206 Wang, J., Meng, Y., and N. Zhao, "LISP Mobile Node 207 extension", draft-zhao-lisp-mn-extension-02 (work in 208 progress), October 2011. 210 Authors' Addresses 212 Mohamed Boucadair 213 Orange 214 Rennes 35000 215 France 217 EMail: mohamed.boucadair@orange.com 219 Christian Jacquenet 220 Orange 221 Rennes 35000 222 France 224 EMail: christian.jacquenet@orange.com